The United States leads the planet in two arenas.Coincidence?
Friday, September 25, 2009
Sunday, September 20, 2009
17th Annual Buster Keaton Celebration
Buster Keaton is an American comic genius.
His improbable show-biz life - born to wandering sub-vaudeville performing parents, rising to the top ranks of silent film comedy, a precipitous fall due to alcohol, bad business decisions and very human failings, and finally, a semi-successful comeback in early television - is the stuff of entertainment legend.
His classic films are almost too numerous to mention (feature films "The General", "Our Hospitality", "College", "The Cameraman" come to mind, plus such great shorts as "One Week"), and are widely available.
Iola, Kansas is a few miles away from the tiny village where Keaton was born while his parents were on a never-ending vaudeville tour. For the seventeenth consecutive year, The Buster Keaton Celebration will take place in this small southeastern Kansas town. Each festival spotlights a specific aspect of Buster's life. The 2009 edition will explore his World War I enlistment.
We had the great fortune to attend this event a couple of years ago - it was a hoot, with intriguing speakers, great films and a cool small-town atmosphere. Check out the Keaton Festival website here: http://www.busterkeatoncelebration.org/
For America, War Is Real Good Business
"Because the United States does not look like a militarized country, it's hard for Americans to grasp that Washington is a war capital, that the United States is a war state, that it garrisons much of the planet, and that the norm for us is to be at war somewhere at any moment."
"What does it mean when the most military-obsessed administration in our history (Bush II), which, year after year, submitted ever more bloated Pentagon budgets to Congress, is succeeded by one headed by a president who ran, at least partially, on an antiwar platform, and who has now submitted an even larger Pentagon budget?"
"If...weaponry is being endlessly developed for our safety and security, and that of our children and grandchildren, why is it that one of our most successful businesses involves the sale of the same weaponry to other countries? The U.S., with $37.8 billion in arms sales (up $12.4 billion from 2007), controlled 68.4% of the global arms market in 2008."
TomDispatch.com is a valuable web site, calling itself the "antidote to the mainstream media." Tom Englehardt's excellent article, "Is America Hooked On War?" is a question for which any clear-thinking citizen already knows the answer.
"Defense" spending makes up more than half of the annual federal budget every year, and weapons industries continue to make up a major segment of our economy. Yet this wholly anti-Christian and anti-humanity government program is never questioned by the media, our elected representatives, or by most citizens of the nation.
Indeed, if the American government's addictive attachment to weapons and death is ever questioned, a likely answer will have something to do with the treasonous act of second-guessing the defense of the nation. Defending the USA against...whom, exactly? And, as Mr. Englehardt points out, if we as a nation are so afraid of other countries, why do we sell more weapons to other countries than anyone on the planet?
Essential reading, sobering statistics, and a subject that anyone who professes Christian/humanitarian ideals must ponder. Thanks, Tom.
"Approaches...Differ Among Health Care Plans" - Or At Least The Ones We Choose To Write About
Click the link to read an Associated Press story puporting to explain the latest health care reform proposals spinning around in Congress.
What will you not read about in this widely published article? There is not a single word about either House Resolution 676 that proposes a single-payer system, or Senate Bill 703, the American Health Security Act of 2009 that also proposes a universal health care system. These are among the "several bills" mentioned in the article, but no details.
How will citizens be able to contrast and compare the various "approaches" to health care reform if all the measures before Congress are not analyzed in the media? The article calls one segment "the House Democratic bill" - which must be news to Democratic House Representative Dennis Kucinich, the author of H.R. 676.
As usual, be wary of what you read in print media and see and hear on television - these days, what's not being discussed is often the option that holds the most value for the public.
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Letters To Washington
The latest report on letters I send to my Senators, both elected (Mark Udall) and appointed (Michael Bennet), and House Representative (Ed Perlmutter) in Washington - this time with some replies!
On 9/11/09 I sent letters asking where each man stands on establishing a new government commission to re-investigate the World Trade Center and Pentagon explosions in 2001. I noted that the original 9/11 Commission was hampered by a lack of funds, restricted in its mission by the Congress and White House, and finally issued a report that has been criticized widely for its omissions and interpretations. So far I have received one reply, from Rep. Perlmutter:
September 17, 2009
Dear Kevin,
This week we remember the fateful events of September 11, 2001. Eight years later we continue to remember the 3,000 lives lost and our thoughts go to their families. We also honor the brave first responders who showed so much courage that day.
As a Member of Congress, one of my most important goals is to provide first responders with every resource they need. I recently announced the Commerce City Police Department will be able to hire or retain four new police officers as part of a nationwide $1 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act grant. Commerce City will receive $872,612.00, and the state of Colorado will receive more than $5 million total to bolster law enforcement personnel.
On March 16th, 2009, I introduced the Firefighter's Fatality Reduction Act in the House of Representatives. This legislation will create a study to look at fire departments across the country and determine their compliance with established safety standards and to propose ways to boost compliance to protect our communities. Each year our nation loses approximately 100 firefighters in the line of duty. We need to provide fire departments across the country with the tools they need to prevent injury and the loss of life in the line of duty.
First responders keep our families and communities safe, and it is important for Congress to pass legislation to promote their optimal health and safety. I look forward to continuing to work with my colleagues in Congress and President Obama to ensure the men and women who protect our communities are safe and have adequate resources to do their job.
Dear Kevin,
This week we remember the fateful events of September 11, 2001. Eight years later we continue to remember the 3,000 lives lost and our thoughts go to their families. We also honor the brave first responders who showed so much courage that day.
As a Member of Congress, one of my most important goals is to provide first responders with every resource they need. I recently announced the Commerce City Police Department will be able to hire or retain four new police officers as part of a nationwide $1 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act grant. Commerce City will receive $872,612.00, and the state of Colorado will receive more than $5 million total to bolster law enforcement personnel.
On March 16th, 2009, I introduced the Firefighter's Fatality Reduction Act in the House of Representatives. This legislation will create a study to look at fire departments across the country and determine their compliance with established safety standards and to propose ways to boost compliance to protect our communities. Each year our nation loses approximately 100 firefighters in the line of duty. We need to provide fire departments across the country with the tools they need to prevent injury and the loss of life in the line of duty.
First responders keep our families and communities safe, and it is important for Congress to pass legislation to promote their optimal health and safety. I look forward to continuing to work with my colleagues in Congress and President Obama to ensure the men and women who protect our communities are safe and have adequate resources to do their job.
Sincerely,
Ed Perlmutter - Member of Congress
Every letter I've ever gotten back from Rep. Perlmutter is like this one - never answers the question, never addresses the topic I've raised directly. Instead, his staff searches for any legislative action that is most closely related to my letter and reports back on how the congressman voted. It's that kind of specific give-and-take dialogue that gives me confidence that my elected representative is truly listening.
On that same day, I sent all three this letter concerning President Obama's health care speech. This is the version I sent to Ed Perlmutter, which references his "telephone town hall" conference. During the Congressional vacation, Perlmutter held a couple of these "I'm listening" sessions rather than actually facing his constituents.
Rep. Perlmutter:
President Obama's speech on 9/9 about health care reform was a severe disappointment.
The news that the government will require citizens to purchase a rapacious, inefficient product - private health care insurance - under threat of financial penalty is an unprecedented act.
What other national government on this planet would contemplate forcing its citizens to fork over money to purchase for-profit private health insurance? And offer public tax subsidies to help that cause!
Let me get this straight - folks who cannot afford health insurance will be given government taxpayer money to hand over to a for-profit company?
A vote for this absolute travesty of "reform" is a vote to approve the ultimate corporate takeover of the US government.
Taxpayers are already shelling out trillions to private weapons/support contractors for a war that the majority of the public does not want. So why does Congress - even when they promise to end the foreign occupations - continue to wage war? Because some very big companies have more influence than voters.
And now the health insurance industry wants in on that "guaranteed money" scheme via Congressional action. Talk about denying choice and rationing care! And now that the public option may go away, what's to stop these companies from continuing their mega-profit practices?
I have no faith in Congress to get this most important issue fixed. There is no evidence in the bills presented so far that health insurance costs/prices will be effectively controlled.
Every other industrialized nation on the planet has solved this problem in favor of its citizens. Congress is proposing to continue a for-profit approach to the health of the nation that benefits a few at the expense of the many.
Representative Perlmutter, providing the citizens of America is a moral issue, not a business issue. Where do you stand - with for-profit corporations or the best health option for Coloradoans?
Support Representative Kucinich's H.R. 676 - universal health care, as practiced around the globe by countries who care for their citizens.
By the way, I signed up for the 8/25 telephone town hall - what a concept, are you afraid to face your constituents in person? - but was never notified, via phone message or email, of the call-in number.
The news that the government will require citizens to purchase a rapacious, inefficient product - private health care insurance - under threat of financial penalty is an unprecedented act.
What other national government on this planet would contemplate forcing its citizens to fork over money to purchase for-profit private health insurance? And offer public tax subsidies to help that cause!
Let me get this straight - folks who cannot afford health insurance will be given government taxpayer money to hand over to a for-profit company?
A vote for this absolute travesty of "reform" is a vote to approve the ultimate corporate takeover of the US government.
Taxpayers are already shelling out trillions to private weapons/support contractors for a war that the majority of the public does not want. So why does Congress - even when they promise to end the foreign occupations - continue to wage war? Because some very big companies have more influence than voters.
And now the health insurance industry wants in on that "guaranteed money" scheme via Congressional action. Talk about denying choice and rationing care! And now that the public option may go away, what's to stop these companies from continuing their mega-profit practices?
I have no faith in Congress to get this most important issue fixed. There is no evidence in the bills presented so far that health insurance costs/prices will be effectively controlled.
Every other industrialized nation on the planet has solved this problem in favor of its citizens. Congress is proposing to continue a for-profit approach to the health of the nation that benefits a few at the expense of the many.
Representative Perlmutter, providing the citizens of America is a moral issue, not a business issue. Where do you stand - with for-profit corporations or the best health option for Coloradoans?
Support Representative Kucinich's H.R. 676 - universal health care, as practiced around the globe by countries who care for their citizens.
By the way, I signed up for the 8/25 telephone town hall - what a concept, are you afraid to face your constituents in person? - but was never notified, via phone message or email, of the call-in number.
So far, I've gotten two replies. First, from Senator Bennet:
Dear Kevin: Thank you for contacting me. I appreciate hearing from you.
The input of fellow Coloradans is essential in my consideration of the wide variety of important legislation and issues that come before the Senate each year. I hope you will continue to inform me of your thoughts and concerns throughout my term as your Senator.
I will continue to work hard to best represent the priorities of Coloradans and all Americans in a thoughtful and independent manner. For more information about my priorities as a U.S. Senator and about issues of importance to Colorado and our nation, I invite you to visit my website at http://bennet.senate.gov/.
Again, thank you for writing.
Sincerely,
Michael Bennet - United States Senator
Wow, thanks to whoever on un-elected Senator Bennet's staff took thirty seconds to type my email address into the computer and send me this brief yet succinct blow-off.
I got this longer non-answer from Senator Udall:
September 15, 2009
Dear Kevin,
Thank you for contacting me regarding health insurance reform. I appreciate your taking the time to express your specific views on this important topic facing our nation.
Thank you for contacting me regarding health insurance reform. I appreciate your taking the time to express your specific views on this important topic facing our nation.
As you know, many proposals have been put on the table for reforming our health care system to make it work for all Americans. I recognize there are many, often competing, philosophies and ideas on the best way to move forward. As your Senator, it is my job to listen closely to the various stakeholders involved in this process as well as actively seek out input from across the state to help inform my understanding of what is best for Colorado. One thing I firmly believe, however, is that the status quo is unacceptable and unsustainable.
While we move forward in this debate, there are a number of key requirements which will guide my consideration. Any health reform must: 1) allow people who like the coverage they currently have to keep it; 2) bring costs down so that all Coloradans are able to cover their families while staying within their means; 3) preserve the critical doctor-patient relationship, ensuring that decisions about treatment are made by those who know the patient the best; 4) call for insurers to provide coverage regardless of pre-existing conditions or medical history; and 5) be fiscally responsible. By ensuring that these pieces are part of reform, we can provide the stability in health care that is currently lacking for hard working Coloradans - stable costs, stable coverage, and stable quality. Cost-effective ideas to improve health like emphasizing prevention and wellness programs, early screening and diagnosis, and chronic disease management are just a few pieces of the puzzle that I think can help us get there.
Another important piece to the puzzle is ensuring that health reform expands access to care for those living in rural communities, which is why I recently introduced legislation known as the Rural Physician Pipeline Act of 2009 (S.1628). This bill is designed to improve health care in rural communities by helping medical schools establish programs to recruit and train medical students who want to practice in rural areas. The provisions in this legislation are based on a successful program at the University of Colorado School of Medicine, and there is evidence to suggest that, if similar programs are expanded, as called for in my bill, we can dramatically increase the number of rural doctors nationwide.
Additionally, health reform must include provisions aimed at helping to alleviate the financial burden placed on small business owners who struggle to provide health coverage to their employees. This is especially true for those small businesses that have seen the cost of coverage grow at such an alarming rate that they are unable to stay competitive in maintaining a talented pool of workers. Small businesses are the driving force of our economy and we must pass health insurance reform which provides them a pooled marketplace from which to purchase coverage and offers credits to make plans affordable.
Reforming our health care system will not be easy, but it is imperative. As Congress continues looking for the best ways to meet our nation's health care challenges, please know that I will always keep the best interests of Coloradans in mind. Along the way, I will certainly remember your particular thoughts and concerns.
I will continue to listen closely to what you and other Coloradans have to say about matters before Congress, the concerns of our communities, and the issues facing Colorado and the nation. My job is not about merely supporting or opposing legislation; it is also about bridging the divide that has paralyzed our nation's politics. For more information about my positions and to learn how my office can assist you, please visit my website at www.markudall.senate.gov.
From my perspective, there is so much about this missive that I take issue with that I can only reiterate what I wrote to the senators: Senator Bernie Sanders' Senate Bill 703, the American Health Security Act of 2009 is the only Senate health care reform bill worth considering. It proposes to install a universal health care apparatus for the USA. Interesting, it has no co-sponsors - wonder if Bennet and Udall have considered joining up?
- (Interestingly enough, whenever I wrote to the former Senator Wayne Allard (R), I always got a reponse in the regular mail that directly addressed my question/concern and showed me that someone in his office actually read and thought for a bit about my email. That has never happened with the current Democratic trio.)
While it is never less than an exercise in futility, I continue to write and call my representatives. I won't contribute to their campaigns, and I won't vote for them, but they are the official conduit for me to express my opinions. I urge everyone reading to do the same - often.
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
The New Illiteracy Takes Over
"The US government is more than willing to invest billions in wars, lead the world in arms sales and give trillions in tax cuts to the ultra rich, but barely acknowledges the need to invest in those educational and civic institutions - from schools to the arts - that enable individuals to be border crossers, capable of connecting the private and the public as part of a more vibrant understanding of politics, identity, agency and governance." - Henry A. Giroux
Truthout has published a highly recommended article by Henry Giroux - "The Spectacle Of Illiteracy and the Crisis of Democracy" - which examines American anti-intellectualism, ever-growing civic illiteracy, and how both are undermining the democratic foundations of the USA.
The American education system devalues important skills such as the ability to question and critically think through issues. The result is a "chronic...and deadly civic illiteracy" that renders individuals unable to connect personal troubles to larger societal issues; the country has "moved from a culture of questioning to a culture of shouting, and in doing so (has) restaged politics and power in both unproductive and anti-democratic ways." The current health care reform "debate" is but the latest example.
Giroux places the timeline of this disintegration - the inability to connect the personal with the public - against the rise of the corporation and militarism as major influences in American life. As he writes, "How else to explain the rage against big government, but barely a peep against the rule of big corporations, which increasingly control not only the government, but almost every vital aspect of our lives from health care to the quality of our environment?" Military/weapons industries dominate our economy and authoritarian violence and blood defines our American culture, from movies/television to video games to sports.
The lesson: teach your children...to question. Before it's too late.
Friday, September 11, 2009
9/11 - The Day America Changed
America changed on 9/11/01. When the World Trade Center towers - three of them - fell into a their own neat piles of rubble, also vaporized were an array of individual civil liberties and privacy protections for American citizens. And a new, openly militaristic USA stepped onto the global scene.
Yet the incident that precipitated fundamental changes in America - the destruction of three buildings and the deaths of 3,000+ - has never been fully investigated or satisfactorily explained by official government agencies. In fact, the Bush Administration stalled an investigation for over one year, and then severely proscribed what the eventual 9/11 Commission could and could not look into. Congress did not contest the restrictions. And there is no hue and cry in today's government to re-open an investigation into the events of that history-altering day.
On September 12, 2001 the American Empire went fully above ground - the largely covert actions of the past became massive, openly sanctioned missions. The highlights include:
- Illegal, ultimately unfounded invasions and ongoing military occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan, costing USA taxpayers trillions of dollars and the deaths of thousands of Americans, and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and Afghans - many of them innocent bystanders.
- Passing American (not international) laws that give the USA the right to arrest any "terrorist" suspect anywhere on the planet at anytime, and hold them indefinitely.
- Colluding with other countries to secretly transport detainees and use "enhanced interrogation" techniques at undisclosed foreign locations.
- To accomplish all this, Defense Department budgets have increased every year since 2002.
At home the Empire went to work as well, instituting restrictive and authoritarian measures including:
- Creating a billion-dollar private arms/survelliance market built around the new Homeland Security Department.
- Passing laws removing the right of habeus corpus (one of the oldest individual legal guarantees).
- Passing laws allowing for nearly limitless electronic surveillance of individuals.
- Allowing government actions (via arrests, property seizures, IRS audits, etc) against anyone the Executive branch suspects may be aiding "terrorists."
And, over time, the people's representatives - the Congress, with both Republican and Democratic majorities - approved and renewed these laws.
There is an abundance of independent scientific research available that calls into doubt the conclusions reached by the 9/11 Commission and National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). Some books, films and web sites are listed at the end of this post - and many of the movies may be streamed or downloaded for free.
My request to all Americans: ask questions! A government report tells us one story, and scientific theory, transparent research, and independently verified lab results tell another. Which is true? Why don't we know? Why not have a new investigation? Ask your Senator and Congressional representatives how they stand on this issue.
America changed in many drastic ways on 9/11/01. Don't we owe it to those who died that day - and to a planet whose face the USA has changed based on its military actions and killing since then - to find out what really happened?
9/11 Truth.org - Top 40 Questions To Ask About 9/11: http://911truth.org/article.php?story=20041221155307646
9/11: Blueprint For Truth - architects and engineers independently analyze the available evidence on DVD: http://www.peaceproject.com/books/dvd176.htm
9/11: Press For Truth - a movie detailing the efforts of a group of 9/11 widows as they work to begin an official investigation at all levels of government: http://www.911pressfortruth.com/
Theologian Dr. David Ray Griffin has devoted years to rigorously examining 9/11 evidence, media coverage, and government reports - with a transparency that begs many, many questions of the official story. Notable are his books "The New Pearl Harbor," "9/11 Commission: Omissions and Distortions", and especially "Debunking 9/11 Debunking": http://www.amazon.com/Debunking-11-Mechanics-Defenders-Conspiracy/dp/156656686X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1252693032&sr=8-1
Griffin's newest book concerns the third building that fell on 9/11 - without being hit by an airplane: "The Mysterious Collapse of World Trade Center 7: Why The Final Official Report on 9/11 Is Unscientific And False" http://www.amazon.com/Mysterious-Collapse-World-Trade-Center/dp/1566567866/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1252693088&sr=8-1
Thursday, September 10, 2009
Obamacare: Good For What Ails Health Insurance Companies (Except They Are Not Sick - In Fact, They're Feeling Much Better!)
I did not watch President Obama's speech on September 9 - although hearing a congressman shout out "you lie!" would have been fun. I've often thought the British Parliament does it best. Get the Prime Minister in the same room on a regular basis with the representatives and everyone gets down to shouting. Here there is way too much decorum when it comes to the President.
Anyway, from news accounts I've perused, Mr. Obama did the expected thing and continued his retreat from his 2003 declaration of support for true universal health care in America. He indicated then that only one thing was necessary to enable the USA to join the rest of the industrialized world in the most efficient and inclusive health care system ever devised: a Democratic president and Democratic majorities in the Senate and House of Representatives.
So here we are six years later, and those prerequisites have been fulfilled. So where is the single-payer solution? Dead as a doornail in the White House view. And now the president is backing away the extremely modest government-run public option in a proposal mainly designed to add millions of new customers to the bloated, inefficient and "uniquely American" for-profit corporate health insurance "industry". The plan advocates something that every conservative in America should be vocally opposing: a federal law requiring everyone to purchase some sort of private corporate insurance. Talk about restricting choice!
Let's repeat that: the government, run by public tax dollars, will require the citizens to purchase private corporate insurance. Whether it's through your employer or on your own, citizens will face a tax penalty if they cannot prove they are paying a for-profit corporation for health insurance. But there's more! Tax subsidies will be issued to those who cannot fully afford the legal requirement to buy insurance. The government will give public dollars to citizens to pass on to for-profit corporations. A bailout by another name? And these companies aren't failing financially!
At least a small public option would give the most economically disadvantaged Americans a recourse - a non-profit insurance group that would operate as a last resort. But the president has signaled that it's not essential. Instead, the for-profit system would have no competition or impetus to hold down costs/prices.
I could go on, but fortunately Matt Taibbi, writer and blogger at Rolling Stone, has effectively recapped the sordid history of the health care "reform" and analyzed the legislative loopholes that will continue to provide mega-millions in profits to companies who make money by denying care. And we will all suffer. Read his story, "Sick And Wrong" here:http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/29988909/sick_and_wrong
Anyway, from news accounts I've perused, Mr. Obama did the expected thing and continued his retreat from his 2003 declaration of support for true universal health care in America. He indicated then that only one thing was necessary to enable the USA to join the rest of the industrialized world in the most efficient and inclusive health care system ever devised: a Democratic president and Democratic majorities in the Senate and House of Representatives.
So here we are six years later, and those prerequisites have been fulfilled. So where is the single-payer solution? Dead as a doornail in the White House view. And now the president is backing away the extremely modest government-run public option in a proposal mainly designed to add millions of new customers to the bloated, inefficient and "uniquely American" for-profit corporate health insurance "industry". The plan advocates something that every conservative in America should be vocally opposing: a federal law requiring everyone to purchase some sort of private corporate insurance. Talk about restricting choice!
Let's repeat that: the government, run by public tax dollars, will require the citizens to purchase private corporate insurance. Whether it's through your employer or on your own, citizens will face a tax penalty if they cannot prove they are paying a for-profit corporation for health insurance. But there's more! Tax subsidies will be issued to those who cannot fully afford the legal requirement to buy insurance. The government will give public dollars to citizens to pass on to for-profit corporations. A bailout by another name? And these companies aren't failing financially!
At least a small public option would give the most economically disadvantaged Americans a recourse - a non-profit insurance group that would operate as a last resort. But the president has signaled that it's not essential. Instead, the for-profit system would have no competition or impetus to hold down costs/prices.
I could go on, but fortunately Matt Taibbi, writer and blogger at Rolling Stone, has effectively recapped the sordid history of the health care "reform" and analyzed the legislative loopholes that will continue to provide mega-millions in profits to companies who make money by denying care. And we will all suffer. Read his story, "Sick And Wrong" here:http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/29988909/sick_and_wrong
P.S. You can find many videos of Mr. Obama promising on the campaign trail to sign a universal health care measure by the end of his first term. That gives him three more years and a couple of months - how does the current measure help advance that cause? Here he is advocating for single payer in 2003 - somehow, in six years, there's been a dramatic about face:
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
Americans Don't Want War In Afghanistan, But Does It Really Matter What They Want?
Will the GOP become the anti-war party in 2010? They threatened an earlier war funding bill tghis year with their purely partisan opposition. Public support for the Democrat-led expansion of the Afghanistan occupation/war is dwindling, according to many reports released today. How will Democratic legislators explain their support for ongoing Middle East war after years of decrying the Bush/Republican invasion/occupation? Here's the CNN story:
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/09/01/cnn-poll-afghanistan-war-opposition-at-all-time-high/
And McClatchy News is reporting that a rift is developing between the military and the administration on expanding the war. How is this going to set with the energy companies that need their oil pipelines/infrastructure located in a politically friendly Afghanistan? More troops are required, but "the additional troops are 'only a down payment on what would be required to turn things around, and everyone knows that,' said another senior military official."
Nice to see that American military lives are measured in terms of future payments for the profit of Big Oil. And that these same lives are a political football in Washington - that will be cold comfort for the mourning families of military men and women killed in the meantime.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/3303057
If President Obama really wants to create change, he could start by doing the morally correct thing - replace all those troops and contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan with humanitarian aid and capital for civic improvements like hospitals, schools and power/communications plants. Think that is an option that will be discussed in Washington?
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/09/01/cnn-poll-afghanistan-war-opposition-at-all-time-high/
And McClatchy News is reporting that a rift is developing between the military and the administration on expanding the war. How is this going to set with the energy companies that need their oil pipelines/infrastructure located in a politically friendly Afghanistan? More troops are required, but "the additional troops are 'only a down payment on what would be required to turn things around, and everyone knows that,' said another senior military official."
Nice to see that American military lives are measured in terms of future payments for the profit of Big Oil. And that these same lives are a political football in Washington - that will be cold comfort for the mourning families of military men and women killed in the meantime.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/3303057
If President Obama really wants to create change, he could start by doing the morally correct thing - replace all those troops and contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan with humanitarian aid and capital for civic improvements like hospitals, schools and power/communications plants. Think that is an option that will be discussed in Washington?
Obama The Tyrant? No, Just The Current Team Captain
I recently had an interesting email exchange with a respected colleague who told me that I often failed to give the Obama Administration "credit" when it was due. Announcements about new Justice Department investigations, directives and "reforms" sparked that conversation.
There have been encouraging signs: modification of some of the worst Bush-era policies in the environmental area, and the recent Justice Department announcement about investigating CIA torture activities and revamping its Civil Rights Division. But as many have pointed out, rolling back extreme right policies to a new "center" that still tilts to the right is not progress; and the CIA torture investigation ground rules could ultimately lead to another round of "punish the little guys while the big guys go free" results that are the norm for these exercises.
Despite these positive moves, in the major arenas of government action - war, surveillance, assisting corporate dominance - Team American Empire (TAE) continues to roll down the field. First, an excerpt from one of the exchanges:
"...we could definitely have a conversation about the assertion that 'overall domestic surveillance and secret prisons are okay' with the current administration.
Obama has specifically reversed and rejected Bush-era interrogation policies that allow for secret prisons (please give me examples that can show me what I’m missing), and before he was president he voted for a revised domestic surveillance program that put quite a few restrictions on what the government and private entities could and could not do (please give me examples that can show me what I’m missing).
I just don’t buy this notion that Obama somehow has a personal agenda to spy on Americans, take away their liberties, oppress citizens of other countries, and give every major corporation a big payday so he can retire happy."
(Drum roll, please) My response:
I do not believe that Mr. Obama has tyrannical or dictatorial ambitions.
He is the temporary team captain placed at the head of Team American Empire, a loose-knit collective with a single purpose: market domination and stability for financial profit. Team American Empire moves inexorably forward towards its goals via the combined efforts of the business community, its (often well-paid) cohorts in Congress and the revolving employment doors of government regulatory agencies. Every empire in history has followed the basic contours of this model. We are not re-inventing the wheel here.
The latest round of candidates for interim Empire team captain - Mr. Obama, Mr. McCain, Mrs. Clinton – all had been vetted by the major monied class. Whatever their differences, none of that trio were proposing to shut down the biggest business projects of our day: armaments and oil. And all were oppositional or purposely vague on health care reform (although I would like to believe Mrs. Clinton would have pushed hardest for meaningful change).
The guy sitting in the Presidential seat now may have the best intentions in the world, but he got to that position by being a willing team player. The current occupant, in his first six months, has undoubtedly proved he can be counted on to lead Team American Empire.
So it matters little what Mr. Obama’s personal feelings on key issues might be. The actions have been taken. In the realm of unhindered domestic surveillance, he voted to extend FISA – call me reactionary, but why does the government need to screen every email in America? Make all the new “restrictions” on surveillance you want – private communications corporations are assisting the government effort to screen everything. Maintaining a domestic surveillance network is much more about political paranoia and retaining domestic power than identifying “terrorists”.
Secret prisons – for me, it’s common sense. The President says we’ll close them, and the CIA director says they will be decommissioned. But do you trust the guys in charge of government-sponsored secrecy? The CIA and President both stated they will continue to detain and hold people for questioning – are they going to put them up in hotels? The intelligence arms of the Empire are not being reined in – they are shutting down old facilities and setting up new storefronts, just like they have throughout the post-WWII period.
Even if I believed there is a “reform”, where’s the public accountability to prove these prisons are truly closed? There is no outside-the-government oversight. The mainstream media is manipulated by the government, who knows they will rarely (if ever) begin serious investigations of its pronouncements. So how am I assured that this chapter is closed – I have to trust the President? It is not up to citizens to seek out and prove this information – it is the government’s responsibility to prove accomplishment of its promises to the citizens.
The prime enterprise for Team American Empire today is total dominance - military and financial - of the Middle East. For all the talk of withdrawing troops, Mr. Obama has delivered on his promise to expand the wars/occupation/financial subjugation in the Middle East. Again, he’s not a personal tyrant – just the guy currently in charge of the ongoing (for decades to come) TAE game plan to make Middle East oil a sure thing for big energy companies. McCain or Clinton would have followed this same playbook exactly. And in the next election cycle or two, if our current electoral system is still intact (any bets?), someone else who has been carefully screened and approved will take Obama's place to captain Team American Empire.
I think it boils down to who you choose to believe when it comes to "reforms." I do not accept the "trust us" security/intelligence “reforms” of a publicly-funded government that willfully engages in financially/spiritually corrupting illegal wars for private profit.
For me, this is a an all-or-nothing game. As long as Team American Empire captain Obama keeps getting plays from the owners of industry and money – and the expanding wars, massive domestic surveillance machine, and the fight to preserve health insurance industry profits all point to that reality – there’s little joy in the occasional instance of moving a case of extreme right practice back to the (rightward-drifting) center.
There have been encouraging signs: modification of some of the worst Bush-era policies in the environmental area, and the recent Justice Department announcement about investigating CIA torture activities and revamping its Civil Rights Division. But as many have pointed out, rolling back extreme right policies to a new "center" that still tilts to the right is not progress; and the CIA torture investigation ground rules could ultimately lead to another round of "punish the little guys while the big guys go free" results that are the norm for these exercises.
Despite these positive moves, in the major arenas of government action - war, surveillance, assisting corporate dominance - Team American Empire (TAE) continues to roll down the field. First, an excerpt from one of the exchanges:
"...we could definitely have a conversation about the assertion that 'overall domestic surveillance and secret prisons are okay' with the current administration.
Obama has specifically reversed and rejected Bush-era interrogation policies that allow for secret prisons (please give me examples that can show me what I’m missing), and before he was president he voted for a revised domestic surveillance program that put quite a few restrictions on what the government and private entities could and could not do (please give me examples that can show me what I’m missing).
I just don’t buy this notion that Obama somehow has a personal agenda to spy on Americans, take away their liberties, oppress citizens of other countries, and give every major corporation a big payday so he can retire happy."
(Drum roll, please) My response:
I do not believe that Mr. Obama has tyrannical or dictatorial ambitions.
He is the temporary team captain placed at the head of Team American Empire, a loose-knit collective with a single purpose: market domination and stability for financial profit. Team American Empire moves inexorably forward towards its goals via the combined efforts of the business community, its (often well-paid) cohorts in Congress and the revolving employment doors of government regulatory agencies. Every empire in history has followed the basic contours of this model. We are not re-inventing the wheel here.
The latest round of candidates for interim Empire team captain - Mr. Obama, Mr. McCain, Mrs. Clinton – all had been vetted by the major monied class. Whatever their differences, none of that trio were proposing to shut down the biggest business projects of our day: armaments and oil. And all were oppositional or purposely vague on health care reform (although I would like to believe Mrs. Clinton would have pushed hardest for meaningful change).
The guy sitting in the Presidential seat now may have the best intentions in the world, but he got to that position by being a willing team player. The current occupant, in his first six months, has undoubtedly proved he can be counted on to lead Team American Empire.
So it matters little what Mr. Obama’s personal feelings on key issues might be. The actions have been taken. In the realm of unhindered domestic surveillance, he voted to extend FISA – call me reactionary, but why does the government need to screen every email in America? Make all the new “restrictions” on surveillance you want – private communications corporations are assisting the government effort to screen everything. Maintaining a domestic surveillance network is much more about political paranoia and retaining domestic power than identifying “terrorists”.
Secret prisons – for me, it’s common sense. The President says we’ll close them, and the CIA director says they will be decommissioned. But do you trust the guys in charge of government-sponsored secrecy? The CIA and President both stated they will continue to detain and hold people for questioning – are they going to put them up in hotels? The intelligence arms of the Empire are not being reined in – they are shutting down old facilities and setting up new storefronts, just like they have throughout the post-WWII period.
Even if I believed there is a “reform”, where’s the public accountability to prove these prisons are truly closed? There is no outside-the-government oversight. The mainstream media is manipulated by the government, who knows they will rarely (if ever) begin serious investigations of its pronouncements. So how am I assured that this chapter is closed – I have to trust the President? It is not up to citizens to seek out and prove this information – it is the government’s responsibility to prove accomplishment of its promises to the citizens.
The prime enterprise for Team American Empire today is total dominance - military and financial - of the Middle East. For all the talk of withdrawing troops, Mr. Obama has delivered on his promise to expand the wars/occupation/financial subjugation in the Middle East. Again, he’s not a personal tyrant – just the guy currently in charge of the ongoing (for decades to come) TAE game plan to make Middle East oil a sure thing for big energy companies. McCain or Clinton would have followed this same playbook exactly. And in the next election cycle or two, if our current electoral system is still intact (any bets?), someone else who has been carefully screened and approved will take Obama's place to captain Team American Empire.
I think it boils down to who you choose to believe when it comes to "reforms." I do not accept the "trust us" security/intelligence “reforms” of a publicly-funded government that willfully engages in financially/spiritually corrupting illegal wars for private profit.
For me, this is a an all-or-nothing game. As long as Team American Empire captain Obama keeps getting plays from the owners of industry and money – and the expanding wars, massive domestic surveillance machine, and the fight to preserve health insurance industry profits all point to that reality – there’s little joy in the occasional instance of moving a case of extreme right practice back to the (rightward-drifting) center.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
